Safe Routes to School Funding in Underserved Communities in - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Safe Routes to School Funding in Underserved Communities

Are Your Underserved Communities Receiving Their Are Your Underserved Communities Receiving Their

in Underserved Communities

Fair Share of SRTS Funding? Fair Share of SRTS Funding?

Brent Hugh Brent Hugh Eric Bunch Eric Bunch Sarah Shipley Sarah Shipley g p y p y Missouri Safe Routes to School Network Missouri Safe Routes to School Network MoBikeFed org/ MoBikeFed org/UnderservedCommunities UnderservedCommunities MoBikeFed.org/ MoBikeFed.org/UnderservedCommunities UnderservedCommunities

SRTS & Underserved Communities

Are underserved communities Are underserved communities Are underserved communities Are underserved communities in Missouri getting their fair in Missouri getting their fair in Missouri getting their fair in Missouri getting their fair share of SRTS funding? share of SRTS funding? s a e o S S u d g s a e o S S u d g

SRTS & Underserved Communities

Executive Order Executive Order Executive Order Executive Order

[E]ach Federal agency shall make achieving [E]ach Federal agency shall make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, health or environmental effects of its programs, policies and activities on minority populations and low-income populations. and low income populations.

The President’s Order for Environmental Justice, Executive Order 12898

SRTS & Underserved Communities

USDOT Guidance USDOT Guidance USDOT Guidance USDOT Guidance

Objective: Objective: j j To avoid, minimize, or mitigate di ti t l hi h d d disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects, including social and economic effects, on minority economic effects, on minority populations and low-income populations populations . . .

An Overview of Transportation and Environmental Justice, U.S. Department of Transportation

SRTS & Underserved Communities

USDOT Guidance USDOT Guidance USDOT Guidance USDOT Guidance

Objective: Objective: j j To prevent the denial of, reduction in, f f

• r significant delay in the receipt of

benefits by minority and low-income y y populations.

An Overview of Transportation and Environmental Justice, U.S. Department of Transportation

SRTS & Underserved Communities

• Defining “underserved”

Defining “underserved”

• How did we collect the data?

How did we collect the data?

• What did we discover?

What did we discover?

• What can we do about it?

What can we do about it?

Defining “Underserved”

• Low Income Students

Low Income Students Low Income Students Low Income Students

Defining “Underserved”

• Low Income Students

Low Income Students Low Income Students Low Income Students

• Minority Students

Minority Students

• Minority Students

Minority Students

Defining “Underserved”

Why these groups? Why these groups? Why these groups? Why these groups?

• Low

Low‐income and minority populations are at income and minority populations are at y p p y p p much greater risk of obesity and inactivity much greater risk of obesity and inactivity

• They are historically underserved by

They are historically underserved by

• They are historically underserved by

They are historically underserved by application based funding sources application based funding sources

• They tend to lack the parental involvement

They tend to lack the parental involvement exhibited by affluent schools exhibited by affluent schools exhibited by affluent schools exhibited by affluent schools

• Fewer champions

Fewer champions

• Specifically mentioned in Executive Order

Specifically mentioned in Executive Order

Defining “Underserved”

• Low Income Students

Low Income Students - % free % free Low Income Students Low Income Students % free % free & reduced lunch eligible & reduced lunch eligible students students

• Minority Students

Minority Students - % as % as

• Minority Students

Minority Students - % as % as reported by school reported by school p y p y

Underserved: Poverty vs. Minority

Poverty Minority

500

Poverty

500

Minority

Mean Mean

300 400 300 400 chools 200 300 200 300 mber of sc 100 100 Num 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Percentage of free & reduced lunch students Percentage of minority students

Underserved: Poverty vs. Minority

100.0% 75.0%

h ed Lunch

Correlation 0 41

50.0%

/Reduce

0.41 (moderate)

25.0%

Free/

0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 50.0% 75.0% 100.0%

Minority

Underserved: Poverty vs. Minority

100.0%

We’re We’re

75.0%

. . . but . . . but t thi t thi starting starting to reach to reach

75.0%

unch

not this not this this . . . this . . .

50.0%

uced Lu

25.0%

ree/Red

0.0%

Fr

0.0% 25.0% 50.0% 75.0% 100.0%

Minority

The Data

How we got the data How we got the data How we got the data How we got the data

• General school

General school data for the entire nation at data for the entire nation at http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/ http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/

The Data

How we got the data How we got the data How we got the data How we got the data

• General school

General school data for the entire nation at data for the entire nation at http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/ http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/ f d f f d f

• List of Missouri SRTS awards from

List of Missouri SRTS awards from MoDOT MoDOT

• Look up minority, free & reduced lunch data

Look up minority, free & reduced lunch data p y, p y, from NCES from NCES S ifi i t ti i h d t S ifi i t ti i h d t

• Specific instructions in handout

Specific instructions in handout

The Data: How we analyzed it

Low Income Students Low Income Students – schools with

schools with

0-

• 25% free/reduced lunch

25% free/reduced lunch

• 25%

25%-

• 50% free/reduced lunch

50% free/reduced lunch 50% 50% 75% f / d d l h 75% f / d d l h

• 50%

50%-75% free/reduced lunch 75% free/reduced lunch

• 75%

75%-100% free/reduced lunch 100% free/reduced lunch 75% 75% 100% free/reduced lunch 100% free/reduced lunch

Minority Students Minority Students – schools with

schools with

Minority Students Minority Students

schools with schools with

• > State average (24.8% in Missouri)

> State average (24.8% in Missouri)

• < State average

< State average

The Data: How we analyzed it

Our question: Are these groups Our question: Are these groups q g p q g p getting their fair share of SRTS getting their fair share of SRTS f di ? f di ? funding? funding?

• Example: Schools in Missouri with greater than

Example: Schools in Missouri with greater than Example: Schools in Missouri with greater than Example: Schools in Missouri with greater than average minority population average minority population

• 182,337 students in those schools

182,337 students in those schools 8 ,33 stude ts t ose sc oo s 8 ,33 stude ts t ose sc oo s

• 30% of Missouri’s school population

30% of Missouri’s school population A th h l i i 30% f Mi i’ A th h l i i 30% f Mi i’

• Are these schools receiving 30% of Missouri’s

Are these schools receiving 30% of Missouri’s SRTS funding? SRTS funding?

Underserved Communities: Results

300

Missouri SRTS Funding by Low Income Population, 2007‐2010

200 300 Received re) 100 200 unding R Fair Shar ent of Fu (100%= 0‐25% 25‐50% 50‐75% 75‐100% Perc Free/Reduced Lunch Percentage

Underserved Communities: Results

Mi i SRTS F di b Mi it

200.00% d

Missouri SRTS Funding by Minority Population 2007‐2010

100 00% 200.00% Received are) 100.00% Funding R =Fair Sha 0.00% Average or Less Than Greater Than Average cent of F (100%= Average Minority Population Minority Population Perc Minority population of the school Minority population of the school

Award Distribution

Missouri Population Distribution Distribution

Award Distribution

Actual Awards Actual Awards By Population By Population

Population Distribution

Minority Minority Poverty Poverty Minority Minority

(Top 25% of schools ranked by minority pop.) (Top 25% of schools ranked by minority pop.)

Poverty Poverty

(Top 25% of schools ranked by FRL% (Top 25% of schools ranked by FRL%)

Population Distribution

Award Distribution Award Distribution Poverty Distribution Poverty Distribution Award Distribution Award Distribution

(if by population) (if by population)

Poverty Distribution Poverty Distribution

(Top 25% of schools ranked by FRL%) (Top 25% of schools ranked by FRL%)

Population Distribution

Missouri Student Minority Population by

100 0%

Missouri Student Minority Population by Urban Classification

100.0% pulation ntage

• rity Pop

y Percen 0.0% Ci Ci Ci S b b T R l Mino by City: Large City: Mid‐size City: Small Suburb Town Rural Locale Type

Population Distribution

Mi i F d R d d L h b

100.0% d

Missouri Free and Reduced Lunch by Urban Classification

100.0% Received are) unding R =Fair Sha 0.0% City: City: City: Suburb Town Rural cent of F (100%= City: Large City: Mid‐size City: Small Suburb Town Rural Perc Locale Type

Underserved: Poverty vs. Minority

100.0% 75.0%

h ed Lunch

Correlation 0 41

50.0%

/Reduce

0.41 (moderate)

25.0%

Free/

0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 50.0% 75.0% 100.0%

Minority

Underserved: Poverty vs. Minority

100.0% 75.0%

. . . but t thi Missouri’s

75.0%

unch

not this reaching this . . .

50.0%

uced Lu

this . . .

25.0%

ree/Red

0.0%

Fr

0.0% 25.0% 50.0% 75.0% 100.0%

Minority

Underserved Communities: Results

Missouri SRTS Funding by Urban

300.00%

Missouri SRTS Funding by Urban Classification 2007‐2011

200.00% lation ntage 100.00% RL Popu by Percen 0.00% F b Locale Type

Underserved Communities: Results

SRTS Funding by Congressional District

30 35

g y g

20 25 Number of Projects 15 20 5 10 Percentage of Awarded Funds

Expected

Urban---- Suburban -------------Rural-------------

Underserved Communities: Results

Low Income 2007‐ Low Income 2011

300

Low Income 2007 2010

300

Low Income 2011

200 200 200 200 100 100

Underserved Communities: Results

Minority Pop. 2011 Minority Pop. 2007‐

200.00%

Minority Pop. 2011

200.00%

Minority Pop. 2007 2010

100.00% 100.00% 0.00% Average or Less Greater Than 0.00% Average or Greater Than Average or Less Than Average Minority Greater Than Average Minority Average or Less Than Average Minority Greater Than Average Minority Population Population Population Minority Population Population

Underserved Communities: Results

Ideal Distribution Ideal Distribution (population) (population)

• Awards

Awards

• Applications 2011

Applications 2011 2007 2007‐2011 2011

Underserved Communities: Results

Conclusions Conclusions

• Prior to 2011, Missouri SRTS funding wasn’t

Prior to 2011, Missouri SRTS funding wasn’t reaching poor or minority schools reaching poor or minority schools reaching poor or minority schools reaching poor or minority schools

• Significant improvement in 2011

Significant improvement in 2011 g

• Our simple interventions worked

Our simple interventions worked

M hi h l th M hi h l th

• More success reaching poor schools than

More success reaching poor schools than minority schools minority schools

• Few funds going to urban populations

Few funds going to urban populations f f f f

• Lack of applications from underserved

Lack of applications from underserved areas is part of the problem (but not all) areas is part of the problem (but not all)

Underserved: What can we do

Our simple interventions worked Our simple interventions worked— —so do so do f h f h more of the same: more of the same:

• Need people from these communities on the Network & SRTS

Need people from these communities on the Network & SRTS Need people from these communities on the Network & SRTS Need people from these communities on the Network & SRTS Advisory Committee Advisory Committee

• Provide SRTS grant application workshops & assistance to

Provide SRTS grant application workshops & assistance to underserved areas underserved areas underserved areas underserved areas

• Outreach/application training via teleconference

Outreach/application training via teleconference

• Mentor

Mentor – – pick a school, any school pick a school, any school We can se the E’ to enco rage that the appl We can se the E’ to enco rage that the appl

• We can use the E’ to encourage that they apply

We can use the E’ to encourage that they apply

• Educate community leaders and elected officials about the SRTS

Educate community leaders and elected officials about the SRTS program and about the disparity program and about the disparity

• Show success stories from other states

Show success stories from other states

• Encourage districts to hire someone for SRTS urban

Encourage districts to hire someone for SRTS urban

• utreach
• utreach
• MoDOT

MoDOT should spend a small % of SRTS funds supporting should spend a small % of SRTS funds supporting this this type of work in underserved areas type of work in underserved areas

Underserved: What can we do

• Recommendations to the DOT:

Recommendations to the DOT:

• Analyze data on poor & minority schools,

h ith SRTS i itt FHWA share with SRTS scoring committee, FHWA

• Consider implementing funding quotas ie:
• Consider implementing funding quotas, ie:
• 15% of funds for schools with 75% or greater free/reduced

lunch lunch

• 40% of funds for schools with greater than average

minority population minority population

• Application limits do limit SRTS in large cities
• Analyze by population not geography

Underserved: What can we do?

and website content addressing the needs low-income communities and schools to improve participation in the SR2S and SRTS programs participation in the SR2S and SRTS programs to ensure that low-income communities are aware of Safe Routes to School opportunities and available technical assistance available technical assistance to currently-funded projects on the federal aid process to increase the number of low-income communities that are able to successfully complete projects and be competitive for that are able to successfully complete projects and be competitive for future funding in low-income communities to identify barriers to applying for and successfully completing SR2S and SRTS barriers to applying for and successfully completing SR2S and SRTS projects and utilizes this information to provide targeted technical assistance to low-income schools and communities to determine what strategies are being employed at to determine what strategies are being employed at the local and District levels to increase participation of low-income communities.

Missouri Safe Routes to School Missouri Safe Routes to School Network Funders Network Funders

Safe Routes to School National Partnership Safe Routes to School National Partnership The Missouri Foundation for Health The Missouri Foundation for Health The Missouri Foundation for Health The Missouri Foundation for Health The Incarnate Word Foundation, St. Louis The Incarnate Word Foundation, St. Louis U S D f H l h d H S i ’ R i VII U S D f H l h d H S i ’ R i VII U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Region VII U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Region VII Office of Minority Health. Office of Minority Health. Blue Cross Blue Cross-

• Blue Shield of Kansas City

Blue Shield of Kansas City Daughters of Charity Foundation of St. Louis Daughters of Charity Foundation of St. Louis g y g y Lutheran Foundation of St. Louis Lutheran Foundation of St. Louis

Special thanks to the members Special thanks to the members

• f the Missouri SRTS Network's
• f the Missouri SRTS Network's

Underserved Communities Underserved Communities Underserved Communities Underserved Communities Action Team, for helping to Action Team, for helping to prepare, analyze, and act on prepare, analyze, and act on this data this data this data this data

Brent Hugh Brent Hugh g Eric Bunch Eric Bunch Sarah Shipley Sarah Shipley Sarah Shipley Sarah Shipley

Missouri Missouri Network Network Organizers Organizers Missouri Bicycle & Pedestrian Missouri Bicycle & Pedestrian Federation Federation MoBikeFed.org/ MoBikeFed.org/UnderservedCommunities UnderservedCommunities saferoutespartnership.org/ saferoutespartnership.org/missouri missouri missouri@saferoutespartnership.org missouri@saferoutespartnership.org @ p p g @ p p g 816 816-

• 695

695-

• 6736

6736